OK explain this idea about healthcare

[url]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090908/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_health_care_overhaul_62[/url]

Fines proposed for going without health insurance

WASHINGTON – Americans who don't get health insurance once the system is overhauled would be fined up to $3,800 under a proposal that circulated in Congress on Tuesday as Democratic leaders cast doubt on prospects for creating a government-run insurance plan.

President Barack Obama prepared what he hoped would be a game-changing speech to a joint session of Congress on Wednesday, his top domestic priority in the balance.

After a month of contentious forums, Americans were seeking specifics from the president. So were his fellow Democrats, divided on how best to solve the problem of the nation's nearly 50 million uninsured.

A government health-insurance option overwhelmingly favored by liberal Democrats appeared to be losing critically needed support.

Into the breach: a bipartisan compromise that Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., a moderate who heads the influential Finance Committee, was trying to broker.

Baucus, meeting with a small group of fellow senators, promoted a plan that would guarantee coverage for nearly all Americans at a cost to taxpayers of under $900 billion over 10 years.

Some experts consider that a relative bargain because the country now spends about $2.5 trillion a year on health care. But it would require hefty fees on insurers, drug companies and others in the health care industry to help pay for it.

Just as auto coverage is now mandatory, so would a requirement that all Americans get health insurance. Penalties for failing to get insurance would start at $750 a year for individuals and $1,500 for families. Households making more than three times the federal poverty level — about $66,000 for a family of four — would face the maximum fines. For families, it would be $3,800, and for individuals, $950.

Baucus would offer tax credits to help pay premiums for households making up to three times the poverty level, and for small employers paying about average middle-class wages. People working for companies that offer coverage could avoid the fines by signing up.

The proposed fines pose a dilemma for Obama. As a candidate, the president campaigned hard against making health insurance a requirement, and fining people for not getting it.

"Punishing families who can't afford health care to begin with just doesn't make sense," he said during his party's primaries. At the time, he proposed mandatory insurance only for children.

White House officials have since backed away somewhat from Obama's opposition to mandated coverage for all, but there's no indication that Obama would support fines.

One idea that Obama championed during and since the campaign — a government insurance option — appeared to be sinking fast.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., told reporters a Medicare-like plan for middle-class Americans and their families isn't an essential part of legislation for him. Hoyer's comments came shortly after a key Democratic moderate said he could no longer back a bill that includes a new government plan.

The fast-moving developments left liberals in a quandary. They've drawn a line, saying they won't vote for legislation if it doesn't include a public plan to compete with private insurance companies and force them to lower costs.

Rep. Mike Ross, D-Ark., who once supported a public option, said Tuesday that after hearing from constituents during the August recess, he's changed his mind.

"If House leadership presents a final bill that contains a government-run public option, I will oppose it," Ross said.

Obama's commitment to a public plan has been in question and lawmakers hoped his speech to Congress would make his position on that clear.

He's called a public plan an important tool to help check the excesses of private industry. But his aides suggested on the weekend that he could sign legislation even if it does not include a public option.

In the Senate, the public plan is not part of Baucus' proposal. He's calling for nonprofit co-ops to compete in the marketplace instead.

An 18-page summary of the Baucus proposal was obtained by The Associated Press. The complex plan would make dozens of changes in the health care system, many of them contentious. For example, it includes new fees on insurers, drug companies, medical device manufacturers and clinical labs.

It would require insurers to take all applicants, regardless of age or health. But smokers could be charged higher premiums. And 60-year-olds could be charged five times as much for a policy as 20-year-olds.

People working for major employers would probably not see big changes. The plan is geared to helping those who now have the hardest time getting and keeping coverage: the self-employed and small business owners. New purchasing pools would be set up in each state, allowing them to band together and get some of the advantages big companies now have.

Hmm a fine for not having insurance and if you can't afford it you will get gubment help. Ok who is this helping? Legal Americans? Illegal Immigrants? People already on the gubment teat? Yeah lets just keep adding more layers of junk and not fix anythng that drains the system.

These bozo's are bouncing ideas off the wall until one sticks or until we all get tired of hearing about it and they slip it in.

The gov can not even explain it! We need to vote everyone out of office that goes along with this crap.

I think you are right Don. If the little kid keeps asking for a cookie you will get tired of telling him no and give in. Greenriverman I'm with you but who else is willing to vote these clowns out? It seems that these wackos get stronger and stronger every year.

[QUOTE=zx150;381716]I think you are right Don. If the little kid keeps asking for a cookie you will get tired of telling him no and give in. Greenriverman I'm with you but who else is willing to vote these clowns out? It seems that these wackos get stronger and stronger every year.[/QUOTE]

They get elected again because of folks voteing a streight ticket. We can no longer do that anymore. Both parties have bad folks in office. We need to look for new folks to elect and this will show the gov that we are tired of the way things are run. We need to study more by watching more than one news channel, listen to the radio and read more than one news paper. At one time news reporters were to report the facts. That does not happen any longer. Today they try to program us as to what to think. A lot of what is going on now you can read about in the book 1984.

I agree. I'm about ready to vote the straight anti incumbent ticket.

I remember reading George Orwell's "1984" in the 6th grade and the impact it made. If you want further results of socialism and big government, read Orwell's "Animal Farm". A very short book with extremely powerful lessons.

[QUOTE=Devils Horse;381760]I agree. I'm about ready to vote the straight anti incumbent ticket.

I remember reading George Orwell's "1984" in the 6th grade and the impact it made. If you want further results of socialism and big government, read Orwell's "Animal Farm". A very short book with extremely powerful lessons.[/QUOTE]

Animal Farm and 1984 were REQUIRED reading when I was in school.

Now, they are HARD to find in the library.......I don't believe ANY LIBRARY in New Albany has them.......

AND THAT *****..........but hey, what do you expect.......it is the liberalization of our society.....

Later,

Geo

That idea is going the wrong way in my opinion. If the government is going to get involved, I'd rather they banned health insurance rather than required it.

I think the health insurance monopoly is one of the main reasons that the cost of health care is so high.

And as a reminder - health INSURANCE does not equal health CARE.

[QUOTE=know1;381771]That idea is going the wrong way in my opinion. If the government is going to get involved, I'd rather they banned health insurance rather than required it.

I think the health insurance monopoly is one of the main reasons that the cost of health care is so high.

And as a reminder - health INSURANCE does not equal health CARE.[/QUOTE]

What about the health insurance companies that own hospitals and employ doctors and other health care providers. I think that they have a lot to do with the high cost of health care. Look at how much they charge for a band aid.

In India if you have a prescription you have that prescription for life. Here we need to go back to the doc every few weeks or months in order to get refills. I have enough smarts to check my blood pressure or sugar in order to see if my meds are working or not.

There does need to be changes in the way we manage our health care but the folks in DC are trying to change to much to fast.